Quote:
There's nothing wrong with Social Security that can't be fixed by raising the retirement age to 90.
- Professor Walter E. Williams (1936-2020)
Taxing Social Security
3,346 Views |
40 Replies |
Last: 11 hrs ago by HarleySpoon
Still think it is insane that we haven't raised the retirement age since the 80s.
Meanwhile, life expectancy has increased by 5+ years.
Meanwhile, life expectancy has increased by 5+ years.
If only the funds were in a LOCK BOX, right?HarleySpoon said:
Again, there is no fund of money for SS in any way different than a fund for defense or welfare that are going to "run out " on any such and such date. It's just rhetoric to raise taxes or shirk social contracts while we bleed deficits on all manner of benefits thru "the social security program" to folks not previously eligible. George W did the most damage. As soon as you "make socially security secure/funded"…they will create a new benefit under the program for folks not paying into the system and "bankrupt" it again.
Us olds were around in 80's when they "made it secure" by raising rates, extending the retirement age and taxing SS benefits only to watch multiple presidents go in and raid the new fund once it was secure.
LOL OLD
Science Denier said:If only the funds were in a LOCK BOX, right?HarleySpoon said:
Again, there is no fund of money for SS in any way different than a fund for defense or welfare that are going to "run out " on any such and such date. It's just rhetoric to raise taxes or shirk social contracts while we bleed deficits on all manner of benefits thru "the social security program" to folks not previously eligible. George W did the most damage. As soon as you "make socially security secure/funded"…they will create a new benefit under the program for folks not paying into the system and "bankrupt" it again.
Us olds were around in 80's when they "made it secure" by raising rates, extending the retirement age and taxing SS benefits only to watch multiple presidents go in and raid the new fund once it was secure.
Why didn't the government think of that????
“If you’re going to have crime it should at least be organized crime”
-Havelock Vetinari
-Havelock Vetinari
SS was always dumped into the general fund; there was/is nothing to "raid". The government has no capacity/methodology to save money.HarleySpoon said:
Again, there is no fund of money for SS in any way different than a fund for defense or welfare that are going to "run out " on any such and such date. It's just rhetoric to raise taxes or shirk social contracts while we bleed deficits on all manner of benefits thru "the social security program" to folks not previously eligible. George W did the most damage. As soon as you "make socially security secure/funded"…they will create a new benefit under the program for folks not paying into the system and "bankrupt" it again.
Us olds were around in 80's when they "made it secure" by raising rates, extending the retirement age and taxing SS benefits only to watch multiple presidents go in and raid the new fund once it was secure.
It's so-called bankruptcy is just that it mathematically spends more than it takes in via SS taxes.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of miseries." - Winston Churchill
Exactly….but the way they "raid it" is buying creating new benefits within it that don't get "funded" in the existing budget horizon.
Featured Stories
See All
66:03
7h ago
5.9k
Players to Watch: No. 15 Texas A&M at Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
54:59
9h ago
1.1k
37:53
6h ago
769
Reed Report: Chatting with D-Kirk, recapping A&M's 4-0 home stand
by Luke Evangelist
10:56
13h ago
2.9k